CVE Intelligence
High

CVE-2026-55953 — TLS 1.2 and DTLS client accepts unoffered anonymous cipher suite, bypassing server authentication

The Erlang/OTP ssl TLS 1.2 (and earlier) and DTLS client does not verify that the cipher suite selected by the server in ServerHello was among the suites offered by the client in ClientHello. The client-side tls_handshake:hello/5 handler validates the negotiated protocol version and the downgrade sentinel but hands the server-chosen suite directly to ssl_handshake:handle_server_hello_extensions/9, which installs it without a membership check. The TLS 1.3 client path performs this check (per RFC 8446), so it is not affected. An on-path attacker between the client and the intended server can respond with a ServerHello selecting an anonymous key exchange suite such as TLS_DH_anon_* or TLS_ECDH_anon_* that the client never offered. Anonymous suites do not require the server to present a certificate, so the entire verify_peer and cacerts configuration is bypassed: the attacker completes the handshake with its own ephemeral parameters, no certificate is validated, no hostname is checked, and ssl:connect returns {ok, Socket}. All subsequent application traffic is readable and modifiable by the attacker. This issue affects OTP from OTP 17.0 before OTP 27.3.4.15, from OTP 28.0 before OTP 28.5.0.4, and from OTP 29.0 before OTP 29.0.4, corresponding to ssl from 5.3.4 before 11.2.12.11, from 11.3 before 11.6.0.4, and from 11.7 before 11.7.4. Whether OTP before OTP 17.0, corresponding to ssl before 5.3.4, is affected is unknown.

Published Jul 27, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: EEF

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • Technical severity (high)+6

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
—
No EPSS score.
Affects
Erlang
Erlang/otp and 1 more
CVSS base
7.4
High · 3 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

  • Documented patch — cna.erlef.org (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
  • Documented patch — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)
  • Documented patch — osv.dev (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Erlang Erlang/otp, Erlang Erlang/ssl).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Erlang Erlang/otp ≥ 17.0 and < 27.3.4.15≥ 28.0 and < 28.5.0.4≥ 29.0 and < 29.0.4 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Erlang Erlang/otp ≥ 17.0 and < 27.3.4.15≥ 28.0 and < 28.5.0.4≥ 29.0 and < 29.0.4≥ 5.3.4 and < 11.2.12.11≥ 11.3 and < 11.6.0.4≥ 11.7 and < 11.7.4≥ 84adefa331c4159d432d22840663c38f155cd4c1 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Erlang Erlang/ssl ≥ 5.3.4 and < 11.2.12.11≥ 11.3 and < 11.6.0.4≥ 11.7 and < 11.7.4 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
9.1 CVSS 4.0 Critical — — 6b3ad84c-e1a6-4bf7-a703-f496b71e49db via NIST National Vulnerability Database
9.1 CVSS 4.0 Critical — — EEF via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
7.4 CVSS 3.1 High 2.2 5.2 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-757

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · erlang/otp
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • Fix documented
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 7.4
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Modified
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Jul 27, 2026 · EEF

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

7 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Erlang
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-757
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-96596 erl_tar:extract/2 loops forever on a GNU sparse member with a trailing hole 1d
  • CVE-2026-94200 TLS 1.3 client ticket store crashed by NewSessionTicket with empty early_data extension in ssl 1d
  • CVE-2026-105236 TLS 1.2 session resumption in ssl crosses SNI virtual-host client-certificate trust boundaries 1d
  • CVE-2026-89422 TLS 1.3 client skips server authentication when ServerHello carries an unsolicited pre_shared_key extension 23d
  • CVE-2026-65634 Superlinear CPU denial of service in Erlang/OTP ASN.1 OBJECT IDENTIFIER decoder 23d
  • CVE-2026-68956 SSH daemon allocates unbounded idle session channels, bypassing max_channels 23d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No FIRST EPSS score.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-55953 is "TLS 1.2 and DTLS client accepts unoffered anonymous cipher suite, bypassing server authentication", rated High. It affects Erlang/otp (Erlang); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.4 describes technical severity. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.